Well, as it pertains to this case, it's accurate.
Going outside the case, and even somewhat outside your statement, I find it vaguely disturbing that the pro-life movement as a whole is almost exclusively punitive. They want to criminalise abortion, investigate miscarriages and accidents as murder, reduce access to birth control, etc.
But more to my point, there's very little support for the fetus or the woman who would be by law the incubator. Opposition to funding not only for school lunches and child assistance, but also for prenatal care, and resistance to care for the mother around childbirth. I think I've mentioned it recently, but when Clinton signed a bill saying hospitals couldn't kick a woman out for 48-72 hours after childbirth, the "pro life" movement was outraged! How dare someone want to provide medical treatment to a woman who's just pushed a baby out of her vagina?
They're not just punitive to women, but to children and fetuses. Pretty much all the above programs are shot down by "your parents should have been more responsible." Even weirder when there's a rising chorus of people who think abortion shouldn't be legal even for instances of rape or incest because "why should the child pay for the actions of the parents?"
Which is a viable argument to defend rapists, but not poor people. Because really, that's all we do to children otherwise. "Why should we feed you when your parents were irresponsible?" or "we're sorry you don't have clothes, but your mommy should have kept her legs shut."
Pro life, indeed.
